Not all of the textual examples are necessary; viewers want to get the idea behind your presentation and focus on what you are saying instead of reading every single detail on the board. One way of tackling this would be to use icons and/or basic illustrations to minimize the amount of content on the board.

When read 'CSS', you interpret that as seperation of structure (HTML) from presentation (CSS). Tables are for tabular data, and are NOT meant to be used for page layout.
If what you say is true, one can pratically pick any HTML element arbitrarily and yet still build a website by overriding with css display cells.
The point is you don't. Use the HTML elements for what they are meant to do.
* Point me to any design and I will develop it more complianct, accessible, usable, "faster-this, smaller-that", then table based.
Until then what I've pointed out still remains as a fact. Larger companies are shifting and investing more resources into doing things properly, whether you like it or not.

Just for the facts:
CSS vs. Table ChallengeWhy tables for layout is stupid
Having said that; it really boils down to identifying ones target audience. If you wish to broaden your reach, it is 'recommended' that the developer conforms to some set of standards.
This is beneficial in numerous ways, as there is a wider and growing support for W3C compliant oriented development. Take new line of CMS's, WYSIWYG editors, for instance; there is a larger trend towards sites being written closer to the recommendations set by W3C. The general incenses are that, these methods reduce development and maintenance costs.
One can always argue that non-compliant code works. In fact, simple text/plain information on a page works without the need of any markup. If the developer wishes to take it a step further, and make the site more appealing, usable and accessible to their readers, then even in this case it is recommended that they follow the guidelines (not rules), set by such organizations. Only then a good user conversion can be obtained.
Please keep in mind that these recommendations are not simply drawn together by the academic minded people. Specifications are established after a wide number of tests; compatibility, flexibility, and moving forward with the needs of today's requirements on the Web. Many companies invest a lot of time and resources into developing these practices with W3C. Surely they justify the need for it?
Why wouldn't one make use of such established research results (standards) and reduce the cost of their development?
Wouldn't you agree?